Posted on November 8, 2017
Author Jacque Ryan, WKVI
The ordinance to regulate the housing and maintenance of animals within the town of North Judson was further discussed during a Monday evening town council meeting.
Council member Jane Ellen Felchuck moved to suspend the second reading and that motion was passed. Town attorney Justin Schramm explained that since they suspended the second reading, if 4 out of the 5 council members approved, they could pass the ordinance then and there.
Felchuck moved to pass the ordinance however since two members, Council President Wendy Hoppe and council member Josh Brown opposed, it was determined to still need a third reading at the next town council meeting.
Schramm said that during the third reading, as long as they receive majority, the ordinance can be passed with a vote of 3 to 2 at that point.
Showing posts with label animal ordinance. Show all posts
Showing posts with label animal ordinance. Show all posts
Wednesday, November 8, 2017
Tuesday, October 17, 2017
North Judson Town Council Holds First Reading Over Animal Ordinance
Posted on October 17, 2017
Author Jacque Ryan, WKVI
An ordinance which has resulted in quite a bit of public attention as well as council consideration received its first reading during last night’s North Judson Town Council meeting. The ordinance regulating the housing and maintenance of animals in the Town of North Judson received unanimous council approval on first reading.
The ordinance is divided into three sections. Section one provides definitions of animals such as cats, dogs, chickens, pot-bellied pigs, rabbits and swine as well as other poultry and domestic animals. It also provides the definitions of phrases such as at large, dangerous animal, feral, free-roaming, harboring, impound and housing.
Section two of the ordinance deals with the regulation of animals. This includes general care as well as registration. The ordinance specifies that individuals must annually register their animals at the Clerk-Treasurer’s Office on or prior to February 15th of the current year.
There are specific subsections pertaining to the requirements associated with chickens, horses and ponies, cats and dogs, rabbits and swine. It specifies that any animals not listed in Section 2 of the ordinance cannot be housed within corporate Town limits. It also says that housing and setbacks are required to conform to the acceptable standards listed in the specific subsection for that animal and must be set a minimum of fifty feet from any property line.
The third section deals with penalties and prohibitions. Section three is divided into subsections dealing with confinement, running-at-large, non-immunized animals, capture and removal and bodily injury caused by an animal.
It goes on to list the penalties which include a first violation fee of $50 and the violator would be given 10 days to correct the violation and a second violation fee of $100 with 5 days allotted for the violation to be corrected. Any violation can result in the potential impoundment of the animal(s) in question. The Town’s code enforcement officer would be in charge of determining whether a violation has occurred but the NJ Police Department and Starke County Humane Society would deal with capture and impoundment respectively.
The final subsection of the ordinance declares that if any part of the ordinance is for any reason determined to be illegal, invalid or unconstitutional by any court of competent jurisdiction, such portion shall be deemed an independent provision and will not affect the validity of the remainder of the ordinance.
This is just a general synopsis of the proposed ordinance which will receive a second reading in the near future. In order to receive a full copy of the ordinance, contact the Clerk-Treasurer’s Office at 310 Lane Street by calling 574-896-3340.
Author Jacque Ryan, WKVI
An ordinance which has resulted in quite a bit of public attention as well as council consideration received its first reading during last night’s North Judson Town Council meeting. The ordinance regulating the housing and maintenance of animals in the Town of North Judson received unanimous council approval on first reading.
The ordinance is divided into three sections. Section one provides definitions of animals such as cats, dogs, chickens, pot-bellied pigs, rabbits and swine as well as other poultry and domestic animals. It also provides the definitions of phrases such as at large, dangerous animal, feral, free-roaming, harboring, impound and housing.
Section two of the ordinance deals with the regulation of animals. This includes general care as well as registration. The ordinance specifies that individuals must annually register their animals at the Clerk-Treasurer’s Office on or prior to February 15th of the current year.
There are specific subsections pertaining to the requirements associated with chickens, horses and ponies, cats and dogs, rabbits and swine. It specifies that any animals not listed in Section 2 of the ordinance cannot be housed within corporate Town limits. It also says that housing and setbacks are required to conform to the acceptable standards listed in the specific subsection for that animal and must be set a minimum of fifty feet from any property line.
The third section deals with penalties and prohibitions. Section three is divided into subsections dealing with confinement, running-at-large, non-immunized animals, capture and removal and bodily injury caused by an animal.
It goes on to list the penalties which include a first violation fee of $50 and the violator would be given 10 days to correct the violation and a second violation fee of $100 with 5 days allotted for the violation to be corrected. Any violation can result in the potential impoundment of the animal(s) in question. The Town’s code enforcement officer would be in charge of determining whether a violation has occurred but the NJ Police Department and Starke County Humane Society would deal with capture and impoundment respectively.
The final subsection of the ordinance declares that if any part of the ordinance is for any reason determined to be illegal, invalid or unconstitutional by any court of competent jurisdiction, such portion shall be deemed an independent provision and will not affect the validity of the remainder of the ordinance.
This is just a general synopsis of the proposed ordinance which will receive a second reading in the near future. In order to receive a full copy of the ordinance, contact the Clerk-Treasurer’s Office at 310 Lane Street by calling 574-896-3340.
Thursday, October 5, 2017
Revisions to NJ Animal Ordinance Suggested Before First Reading Takes Place
Posted on October 5, 2017
Author Jacque Ryan, WKVI
The North Judson Town Council once again reviewed the proposed animal ordinance at their meeting Monday night. The current ordinance is divided into three sections: definitions, regulations and penalties and prohibitions.
Town Attorney Justin Schramm recommended that in order to speed up the process they could have held a first reading and any proposed changes could still be made and presented during the second reading. Some council members were interested in holding the first reading at that time but desired changes presented by other council members left it as just a consideration.
Council President Wendy Hoppe said one of her concerns was that the town does not have an official animal ordinance enforcer, like towns with similar ordinances. Her concern was that the ordinance designates Joe Leszek, the town’s code enforcement officer, as the authority in those matters and he is a part-time employee.
Schramm clarified, stating that Leszek would only be in charge of providing notice that a violation has occurred. Any potential actions would fall under the jurisdiction of the humane society or the police department.
In order to cut down on the amount of pages in the ordinance, which is currently 9 pages, Council member Jane-Ellen Felchuck proposed combining the sections about horses, ponies and swine together into one section since most of the word usage about housing and immunization was the same.
Council member James Young pointed out that a good reason to keep those separate is to see the difference between the fees and to cut down on any potential confusion. He also said they should be focused on content right now rather than wording.
She also expressed concern with the fees listed, but other council members disagreed, stating they felt those were fine. Schramm came up with the fees by asking all the council members for their opinions then taking the average and listing those numbers.
Felchuck was adamant about having the changes made to avoid any potential legal problems and ensure conciseness before a first reading takes place. Council member John Rowe agreed to give Felchuck two weeks to address her concerns and stated that he is ready to move things along.
The first reading of the animal ordinance is anticipated to take place during the next North Judson Town Council meeting on October 16th.
Author Jacque Ryan, WKVI
The North Judson Town Council once again reviewed the proposed animal ordinance at their meeting Monday night. The current ordinance is divided into three sections: definitions, regulations and penalties and prohibitions.
Town Attorney Justin Schramm recommended that in order to speed up the process they could have held a first reading and any proposed changes could still be made and presented during the second reading. Some council members were interested in holding the first reading at that time but desired changes presented by other council members left it as just a consideration.
Council President Wendy Hoppe said one of her concerns was that the town does not have an official animal ordinance enforcer, like towns with similar ordinances. Her concern was that the ordinance designates Joe Leszek, the town’s code enforcement officer, as the authority in those matters and he is a part-time employee.
Schramm clarified, stating that Leszek would only be in charge of providing notice that a violation has occurred. Any potential actions would fall under the jurisdiction of the humane society or the police department.
In order to cut down on the amount of pages in the ordinance, which is currently 9 pages, Council member Jane-Ellen Felchuck proposed combining the sections about horses, ponies and swine together into one section since most of the word usage about housing and immunization was the same.
Council member James Young pointed out that a good reason to keep those separate is to see the difference between the fees and to cut down on any potential confusion. He also said they should be focused on content right now rather than wording.
She also expressed concern with the fees listed, but other council members disagreed, stating they felt those were fine. Schramm came up with the fees by asking all the council members for their opinions then taking the average and listing those numbers.
Felchuck was adamant about having the changes made to avoid any potential legal problems and ensure conciseness before a first reading takes place. Council member John Rowe agreed to give Felchuck two weeks to address her concerns and stated that he is ready to move things along.
The first reading of the animal ordinance is anticipated to take place during the next North Judson Town Council meeting on October 16th.
Wednesday, September 20, 2017
North Judson Animal Ordinance Discussion Continues
Posted on September 20, 2017
Author Jacque Ryan, WKVI
During the North Judson Town Council meeting Monday evening, members confirmed that rather than adding an urban chicken ordinance, they will instead be amending the current animal ordinance to address the concerns brought before the council the last several meetings.
Prior to the meeting, council members received a working document from Town Attorney Justin Schramm. In the working document he provided place-holder numbers and language based off similar ordinances from other towns and cities in the surrounding area. He encouraged the council to let him know where they’d like to see changes or what else they’d like to cover in the ordinance.
Council member Jane-Ellen Felchuk listed a few things that she felt weren’t mentioned in the document provided such as the inclusion of rabbits and pigeons, as well as registration, restrictions on the number of pets, the potential of hiring an animal catcher and how the town responds to rabies, non immunized animals, dangerous animals and cat colonies. She also added that the matter of who is responsible for impoundment and where the animals are taken should be addressed.
Schramm commented that some of the matters Felchuk is concerned about, such as rabies and immunization are actually addressed in state law so it would not need to be included in the ordinance. However, he added that proof of rabies shots and immunization can be required as a part of the ordinance in order to ensure registered pets are sufficiently protected. Felchuck said she worries too many people won’t know about the state laws and feels these matters must be addressed in the ordinance.
Schramm also provided a recommendation of how to go forward with efficient registration techniques.
“I think there should be a separate permit form. I know the city of South Bend does that, where instead of putting it in the ordinance, there’s just a separate permit form where you list the type of fowl you have, for example.” Schramm stated, “That should probably be separate because that’s a good way to tag and identify your animals rather than try to make it exhaustive in the ordinance.”
The council members also discussed matters related to lot size and the distance chicken enclosures would be required to be from a neighbor’s residence and property line. No definite decisions were reached during the council meeting but various council members are continuing personal research to ensure the amended ordinance will address issues expressed by the public during the course of this process.
Author Jacque Ryan, WKVI
During the North Judson Town Council meeting Monday evening, members confirmed that rather than adding an urban chicken ordinance, they will instead be amending the current animal ordinance to address the concerns brought before the council the last several meetings.
Prior to the meeting, council members received a working document from Town Attorney Justin Schramm. In the working document he provided place-holder numbers and language based off similar ordinances from other towns and cities in the surrounding area. He encouraged the council to let him know where they’d like to see changes or what else they’d like to cover in the ordinance.
Council member Jane-Ellen Felchuk listed a few things that she felt weren’t mentioned in the document provided such as the inclusion of rabbits and pigeons, as well as registration, restrictions on the number of pets, the potential of hiring an animal catcher and how the town responds to rabies, non immunized animals, dangerous animals and cat colonies. She also added that the matter of who is responsible for impoundment and where the animals are taken should be addressed.
Schramm commented that some of the matters Felchuk is concerned about, such as rabies and immunization are actually addressed in state law so it would not need to be included in the ordinance. However, he added that proof of rabies shots and immunization can be required as a part of the ordinance in order to ensure registered pets are sufficiently protected. Felchuck said she worries too many people won’t know about the state laws and feels these matters must be addressed in the ordinance.
Schramm also provided a recommendation of how to go forward with efficient registration techniques.
“I think there should be a separate permit form. I know the city of South Bend does that, where instead of putting it in the ordinance, there’s just a separate permit form where you list the type of fowl you have, for example.” Schramm stated, “That should probably be separate because that’s a good way to tag and identify your animals rather than try to make it exhaustive in the ordinance.”
The council members also discussed matters related to lot size and the distance chicken enclosures would be required to be from a neighbor’s residence and property line. No definite decisions were reached during the council meeting but various council members are continuing personal research to ensure the amended ordinance will address issues expressed by the public during the course of this process.
Monday, September 18, 2017
Wednesday, September 6, 2017
Over 300 Resident Signatures Received in Favor of Amending NJ Animal Ordinance
Posted on September 6, 2017
Author Jacque Ryan, WKVI
Although a petition was presented during the North Judson City Council’s regular session, no further action was taken on the animal ordinance. The Council members say further research must be done before any changes can be made.
During a meeting in July, the council said they would consider allowing chickens within city limits if 300 resident signatures in favor of amending or replacing the current ordinance could be submitted before the end of August. Sarah Burkett, the resident pushing for an urban chicken ordinance to be implemented, turned in a petition with 337 resident signatures to the North Judson Town Hall on August 28th.
Town Council President Wendy Hoppe spoke of some citizen concerns that have been brought up to her attention in regards to potential disease that the birds could carry. She referenced a case where a 2-year-old from South Bend died from ‘Chicken Fever’ which she described as a respiratory disorder caused by inhaling toxic fumes from animal waste.
Burkett answered back by saying certain communicable diseases are not limited to chickens, listing a plethora of ailments that can come from deer, dogs, cats and other animals. She also said there should be safety precautions and records in place to ensure the permitted animals aren’t at risk for spreading disease,
Burkett said, “Our chickens are tested every year. I would never want anyone to be hurt, but again we have had chickens for how long and we have picked them up and we have washed our hands and we have not had any illness.”
Council Member John Rowe said that as of that meeting, there will be no change to the ordinance since more research must be done into matters such as waste disposal, lot size and adjacent neighbor concerns.
A public comment called the council’s ability into question, claiming they should work towards managing ordinances and disposing of outdated ones rather than amending this one. Town Marshall Kelly Fisher replied by saying the Code Enforcement Officers have been a big step forward and have made great strides in enforcing ordinances. They invited the concerned citizen to present his observations to Police and the Ordinance Enforcers.
The animal ordinance matter will be revisited during the next town council meeting on October 2nd. Burkett said she’s wiling to provide all the information she’s received from the United States Poultry Association and different universities who have been in contact with her since the start of this initiative if it will assist council members in their future decisions.
Author Jacque Ryan, WKVI
Although a petition was presented during the North Judson City Council’s regular session, no further action was taken on the animal ordinance. The Council members say further research must be done before any changes can be made.
During a meeting in July, the council said they would consider allowing chickens within city limits if 300 resident signatures in favor of amending or replacing the current ordinance could be submitted before the end of August. Sarah Burkett, the resident pushing for an urban chicken ordinance to be implemented, turned in a petition with 337 resident signatures to the North Judson Town Hall on August 28th.
Town Council President Wendy Hoppe spoke of some citizen concerns that have been brought up to her attention in regards to potential disease that the birds could carry. She referenced a case where a 2-year-old from South Bend died from ‘Chicken Fever’ which she described as a respiratory disorder caused by inhaling toxic fumes from animal waste.
Burkett answered back by saying certain communicable diseases are not limited to chickens, listing a plethora of ailments that can come from deer, dogs, cats and other animals. She also said there should be safety precautions and records in place to ensure the permitted animals aren’t at risk for spreading disease,
Burkett said, “Our chickens are tested every year. I would never want anyone to be hurt, but again we have had chickens for how long and we have picked them up and we have washed our hands and we have not had any illness.”
Council Member John Rowe said that as of that meeting, there will be no change to the ordinance since more research must be done into matters such as waste disposal, lot size and adjacent neighbor concerns.
A public comment called the council’s ability into question, claiming they should work towards managing ordinances and disposing of outdated ones rather than amending this one. Town Marshall Kelly Fisher replied by saying the Code Enforcement Officers have been a big step forward and have made great strides in enforcing ordinances. They invited the concerned citizen to present his observations to Police and the Ordinance Enforcers.
The animal ordinance matter will be revisited during the next town council meeting on October 2nd. Burkett said she’s wiling to provide all the information she’s received from the United States Poultry Association and different universities who have been in contact with her since the start of this initiative if it will assist council members in their future decisions.
Tuesday, July 18, 2017
North Judson Council Requests Petition, Before Moving Ahead with Urban Chicken Ordinance
Posted on July 18, 2017
Author Michael Gallenberger, WKVI
The North Judson Town Council is willing to consider an urban chicken ordinance, but first, they’re asking for a petition with 300 residents’ signatures. Council member John Rowe proposed the petition Monday, to gauge the amount of support that exists out in the community and not just among people showing up at council meetings. “If the town wants something, the town can speak and want that,” he said. “If it’s the entire town, then we should change it. That’s how this is meant to be. That’s why we’re here. It isn’t personal. It shouldn’t be our personal feelings.”
For the petition to be accepted by the town council, the 300 residents who sign it must live within the North Judson town limits, be at least 18 years of age, and provide their address or another way of verifying their residency. If the 300 signatures are obtained by August 31, council members will then begin discussing the specifics of the ordinance, such as permit fees, space requirements, and limits to the number of chickens at a particular home. The town council narrowly voted to accept Rowe’s proposal to request the petition, with members Jane Ellen Felchuk and Wendy Hoppe opposing the measure.
Resident Sarah Burkett will be responsible for gathering the necessary signatures. She has been leading the renewed push for an urban chicken ordinance in North Judson, after the town council decided to more strictly enforce the existing animal ordinance. That would have forced Burkett to remove her chickens, but council members have backed down from that decision, at least temporarily.
While Burkett says her chickens were grandfathered in six years ago, there’s an ongoing debate about whether that still applies to the chickens she has now. Council President Wendy Hoppe said Monday that wasn’t the council’s intention at the time the decision was made. “I can say because I sat on that board, and I can honestly say it was said it would be grandfathered until the time the chickens were deceased. . . . If you read the thing, that’s how it was.”
Burkett’s father and landlord Steve Ransom disagreed. “I’ve got an attorney that will argue with you on that,” he said.
“Well, Todd’s going to cite what he wants, but let me cover this now,” responded Town Attorney Justin Schramm. “I haven’t covered this yet because there’s a very convoluted, long, complex, legal argument when it comes to grandfather clauses. I’ve heard this term now for a month, ‘grandfather, grandfather, grandfather.’ A grandfather clause is built into an ordinance or resolution when it is written.”
Schramm said that’s not what happened in this case. “It’s not on that resolution, and it’s not of legal effect,” he said. “They shouldn’t have done that to you. It was bad that they did that to you. But if it didn’t make it into that final resolution or ordinance, my position and my reading has indicated that it is not a legally-enforceable grandfather clause.” However, he pointed out that Burkett is not in violation of the ordinance because the ordinance has not been fully enforced.
Author Michael Gallenberger, WKVI
The North Judson Town Council is willing to consider an urban chicken ordinance, but first, they’re asking for a petition with 300 residents’ signatures. Council member John Rowe proposed the petition Monday, to gauge the amount of support that exists out in the community and not just among people showing up at council meetings. “If the town wants something, the town can speak and want that,” he said. “If it’s the entire town, then we should change it. That’s how this is meant to be. That’s why we’re here. It isn’t personal. It shouldn’t be our personal feelings.”
For the petition to be accepted by the town council, the 300 residents who sign it must live within the North Judson town limits, be at least 18 years of age, and provide their address or another way of verifying their residency. If the 300 signatures are obtained by August 31, council members will then begin discussing the specifics of the ordinance, such as permit fees, space requirements, and limits to the number of chickens at a particular home. The town council narrowly voted to accept Rowe’s proposal to request the petition, with members Jane Ellen Felchuk and Wendy Hoppe opposing the measure.
Resident Sarah Burkett will be responsible for gathering the necessary signatures. She has been leading the renewed push for an urban chicken ordinance in North Judson, after the town council decided to more strictly enforce the existing animal ordinance. That would have forced Burkett to remove her chickens, but council members have backed down from that decision, at least temporarily.
While Burkett says her chickens were grandfathered in six years ago, there’s an ongoing debate about whether that still applies to the chickens she has now. Council President Wendy Hoppe said Monday that wasn’t the council’s intention at the time the decision was made. “I can say because I sat on that board, and I can honestly say it was said it would be grandfathered until the time the chickens were deceased. . . . If you read the thing, that’s how it was.”
Burkett’s father and landlord Steve Ransom disagreed. “I’ve got an attorney that will argue with you on that,” he said.
“Well, Todd’s going to cite what he wants, but let me cover this now,” responded Town Attorney Justin Schramm. “I haven’t covered this yet because there’s a very convoluted, long, complex, legal argument when it comes to grandfather clauses. I’ve heard this term now for a month, ‘grandfather, grandfather, grandfather.’ A grandfather clause is built into an ordinance or resolution when it is written.”
Schramm said that’s not what happened in this case. “It’s not on that resolution, and it’s not of legal effect,” he said. “They shouldn’t have done that to you. It was bad that they did that to you. But if it didn’t make it into that final resolution or ordinance, my position and my reading has indicated that it is not a legally-enforceable grandfather clause.” However, he pointed out that Burkett is not in violation of the ordinance because the ordinance has not been fully enforced.
Monday, July 17, 2017
North Judson Town Council to Continue Discussing Animal Ordinance
Posted on July 17, 2017
Author Michael Gallenberger, WKVI
North Judson’s animal ordinance will continue to be discussed during tonight’s town council meeting. Council members recently decided to enforce the ordinance more strictly, following complaints about chickens and other animals.
While chickens are technically prohibited in town, resident Sarah Burkett says her chicken farm was grandfathered in six years ago. A debate about whether that still applies to the chickens she has now has reopened the discussion about whether chickens should be allowed in general.
Also during tonight’s meeting, the North Judson Town Council is scheduled to hear a presentation from Starke County Economic Development Foundation Special Projects Coordinator Ron Gifford. The town council will meet tonight at 6:30 at North Judson Town Hall.
Author Michael Gallenberger, WKVI
North Judson’s animal ordinance will continue to be discussed during tonight’s town council meeting. Council members recently decided to enforce the ordinance more strictly, following complaints about chickens and other animals.
While chickens are technically prohibited in town, resident Sarah Burkett says her chicken farm was grandfathered in six years ago. A debate about whether that still applies to the chickens she has now has reopened the discussion about whether chickens should be allowed in general.
Also during tonight’s meeting, the North Judson Town Council is scheduled to hear a presentation from Starke County Economic Development Foundation Special Projects Coordinator Ron Gifford. The town council will meet tonight at 6:30 at North Judson Town Hall.
Wednesday, July 5, 2017
Chicken Supporters Meet with North Judson Town Council, As Animal Ordinance Review Continues
Posted on July 5, 2017
Author Michael Gallenberger, WKVI
North Judson’s chickens will be allowed to stay for at least a while longer, as the town continues to review its animal ordinance. Residents filled North Judson Town Hall Monday, as chicken owner Sarah Burkett spoke out against the town council’s decision to more strictly enforce the ordinance. It currently prohibits residents from keeping chickens and other farm animals.
The two main questions are whether the chickens Burkett currently has were grandfathered in, and whether residents should be allowed to have chickens, in general. About 15 people, many of whom live within the town limits, spoke in favor of allowing chickens Monday. There was even a “Save the Chickens” sign.
Supporters of an “urban chicken ordinance” say it would give people the chance to produce their own food, provide educational opportunities for children, and make North Judson more attractive to new residents. Some people added that chickens are less of a nuisance than dogs. Burkett presented copies of animal ordinances from Valparaiso and Chesterton, which both allow chickens.
However, resident Kay Cummins opposed allowing Burkett’s chickens to stay. Cummins said that not having to live next to farm animals was one of the reasons her family chose to live in North Judson several decades ago. But beyond that, she said as long as the town has an ordinance, it should be enforced, whether people like it or not.
Town Attorney Justin Schramm said that council members have three options going forward. “As of right now – and I’m sure people in the room will disagree – it is a legal ordinance,” he explained. “However, the town council has the right and it should either universally enforce it, universally, repeal it, or replace it with something you think would be more palatable to individuals.”
The chicken debate has escalated in recent weeks, after residents complained that certain people were being allowed to keep the animals, even though they’re technically prohibited. The town council granted Burkett an exception six years ago, but there’s an ongoing debate about whether that still applies to the chickens she has now.
Council members voted last month to ban all remaining chickens after this month’s Starke County Fair, after Burkett failed to provide them with requested documentation on the matter. During Monday’s meeting, though, Burkett presented minutes from town council meetings when the issue was discussed in August of 2011. She also complained that town officials never contacted her directly.
However, council member John Rowe disputed Burkett’s claims that the town was singling her out. “None of us went out seeking her chickens or a problem,” he said. “There was an issue brought to the board, like any other issue in the community, brought to us five. We talk about the issue. We review the issue. We review the ordinance. We review everything, and then we sit and talk like we are here tonight. So nobody went over there and tried to maliciously go after these chickens. I’m not for or against it. I want to hear both sides and figure out what’s best for North Judson, and I think I can speak for everybody on that.”
Council members didn’t offer much input Monday, but said they would review the information before taking any action. Schramm said that it wasn’t necessary for Burkett to formally appeal the council’s decision to remove the chickens, since no citations have actually be issued yet.
Author Michael Gallenberger, WKVI
North Judson’s chickens will be allowed to stay for at least a while longer, as the town continues to review its animal ordinance. Residents filled North Judson Town Hall Monday, as chicken owner Sarah Burkett spoke out against the town council’s decision to more strictly enforce the ordinance. It currently prohibits residents from keeping chickens and other farm animals.
The two main questions are whether the chickens Burkett currently has were grandfathered in, and whether residents should be allowed to have chickens, in general. About 15 people, many of whom live within the town limits, spoke in favor of allowing chickens Monday. There was even a “Save the Chickens” sign.
Supporters of an “urban chicken ordinance” say it would give people the chance to produce their own food, provide educational opportunities for children, and make North Judson more attractive to new residents. Some people added that chickens are less of a nuisance than dogs. Burkett presented copies of animal ordinances from Valparaiso and Chesterton, which both allow chickens.
However, resident Kay Cummins opposed allowing Burkett’s chickens to stay. Cummins said that not having to live next to farm animals was one of the reasons her family chose to live in North Judson several decades ago. But beyond that, she said as long as the town has an ordinance, it should be enforced, whether people like it or not.
Town Attorney Justin Schramm said that council members have three options going forward. “As of right now – and I’m sure people in the room will disagree – it is a legal ordinance,” he explained. “However, the town council has the right and it should either universally enforce it, universally, repeal it, or replace it with something you think would be more palatable to individuals.”
The chicken debate has escalated in recent weeks, after residents complained that certain people were being allowed to keep the animals, even though they’re technically prohibited. The town council granted Burkett an exception six years ago, but there’s an ongoing debate about whether that still applies to the chickens she has now.
Council members voted last month to ban all remaining chickens after this month’s Starke County Fair, after Burkett failed to provide them with requested documentation on the matter. During Monday’s meeting, though, Burkett presented minutes from town council meetings when the issue was discussed in August of 2011. She also complained that town officials never contacted her directly.
However, council member John Rowe disputed Burkett’s claims that the town was singling her out. “None of us went out seeking her chickens or a problem,” he said. “There was an issue brought to the board, like any other issue in the community, brought to us five. We talk about the issue. We review the issue. We review the ordinance. We review everything, and then we sit and talk like we are here tonight. So nobody went over there and tried to maliciously go after these chickens. I’m not for or against it. I want to hear both sides and figure out what’s best for North Judson, and I think I can speak for everybody on that.”
Council members didn’t offer much input Monday, but said they would review the information before taking any action. Schramm said that it wasn’t necessary for Burkett to formally appeal the council’s decision to remove the chickens, since no citations have actually be issued yet.
Monday, July 3, 2017
Chicken Debate to Continue During North Judson Town Council Meeting
Posted on July 3, 2017
Author Michael Gallenberger, WKVI
North Judson’s chicken debate is expected to continue during tonight’s town council meeting. The town’s existing animal ordinance prohibits chickens and other farm animals from being raised within the town limits, but there are still some chickens in town.
Last month, the town council voted to enforce the ordinance and remove all remaining chickens after this year’s Starke County Fair. But resident Sarah Burkett says the town council previously decided to let her keep her chickens. She feels the apparent reversal unfairly singles her out. Burkett says many people support the idea of allowing residents to raise chickens in town, and she’s been encouraging them to speak up during tonight’s council meeting.
The town council has already announced plans to review the animal ordinance. Town officials have suggested allowing farm animals on properties that meet certain size requirements and specifically prohibiting the feeding of feral cats.
In other business tonight, council members are expected to get an update on the town’s new compliance officer position. The part-time employee would issue warnings and citations for tall grass and other code violations. Applications for the job were due last Friday.
Tonight’s North Judson Town Council meeting starts at 6:30 at the town hall.
Author Michael Gallenberger, WKVI
North Judson’s chicken debate is expected to continue during tonight’s town council meeting. The town’s existing animal ordinance prohibits chickens and other farm animals from being raised within the town limits, but there are still some chickens in town.
Last month, the town council voted to enforce the ordinance and remove all remaining chickens after this year’s Starke County Fair. But resident Sarah Burkett says the town council previously decided to let her keep her chickens. She feels the apparent reversal unfairly singles her out. Burkett says many people support the idea of allowing residents to raise chickens in town, and she’s been encouraging them to speak up during tonight’s council meeting.
The town council has already announced plans to review the animal ordinance. Town officials have suggested allowing farm animals on properties that meet certain size requirements and specifically prohibiting the feeding of feral cats.
In other business tonight, council members are expected to get an update on the town’s new compliance officer position. The part-time employee would issue warnings and citations for tall grass and other code violations. Applications for the job were due last Friday.
Tonight’s North Judson Town Council meeting starts at 6:30 at the town hall.
Monday, June 26, 2017
North Judson Resident Plans to Fight Chicken Removal
Posted on June 26, 2017
Author Michael Gallenberger, WKVI
The chicken debate is heating up in North Judson. Last week, the town council voted to have police officer Frank Thomas enforce the town’s existing animal ordinance by removing all remaining chickens in town, after next month’s county fair. But one resident says the action unfairly singles her out.
Sarah Burkett says her chickens were grandfathered in by the town council several years ago, and there hasn’t been much of an issue since then. “I actually have spoke to the town, and there have been no complaints about noise or smell, just that they were alive,” she says. “I have gone to most of my neighbors, and no one has an issue with them. Nobody has had any complaints. There have not been any noise complaints from anyone.” She says that the chickens roost and sleep at night, making it unlikely that they’re keeping neighbors up.
But exactly how those chickens were grandfathered in has been a source of confusion during recent council meetings. Council President Wendy Hoppe believed the measure only applied to the specific chickens on the property at the time, and no new chickens could be obtained. To settle the question, council members requested that documentation be provided. As of last week, they hadn’t received any.
However, Burkett says she has a copy of the minutes of the meeting when her chickens were grandfathered in. And she says she wasn’t the only one allowed to keep chickens. “There’s also another farm, that is an actual farm, that has been grandfathered in, and they have not had anything going on,” she says. “So I just don’t know why I’m being singled out.”
Town officials said last week the issue was acreage. Clerk-Treasurer Alicia Collins said when it comes to having animals, there’s a difference between living on a farm and living in the middle of a neighborhood. Collins suggested that council members may consider adding acreage requirements into the ordinance.
Burkett says that several cities allow residents to keep a certain number of chickens with no acreage minimum, including Indianapolis, South Bend, Valparaiso, and Chesterton. But some rural communities have been reluctant to follow suit. Last year, the Winamac Town Council narrowly voted down an urban chicken ordinance. At the time, Winamac officials contacted eight other communities in the area, and none of them recommended allowing chickens within city limits.
However, Burkett says becoming more chicken-friendly could make North Judson more attractive to new residents. “Why are we not trying to attract younger people that are asking to have this? This is the craziest thing. Let’s worry about getting more movies at Norwayne, which is fantastic, getting more color runs. Let’s focus on those things,” she says. “Chickens that aren’t bothering anyone – or I’m sorry, bothering one person – it just seems like a very small thing. I don’t understand it, when I have already been allowed to have them.”
Burkett also takes issue with a comment made during last week’s council meeting by Officer Thomas, regarding the timeline of the chickens’ removal, specifically, “They can get through their 4-H, and then it’s dinner time.”
“I find the humor in it, but very distasteful,” Burkett says, “when you have an eight-year-old that loves her chickens, and then also my three-year-old that goes out and collects chickens. And we have one hen that is very sweet and will allow you to pick her up. My kids are learning how to feed and water and collect eggs. They’re learning where their food comes from. What is the harm in this?”
Burkett plans to discuss the issue with the town council during its next regular meeting on July 3. It’s scheduled for 6:30 p.m. at the North Judson Town Hall, but Burkett says the interest being generated may mean it will have to be moved to a larger venue.
Author Michael Gallenberger, WKVI
The chicken debate is heating up in North Judson. Last week, the town council voted to have police officer Frank Thomas enforce the town’s existing animal ordinance by removing all remaining chickens in town, after next month’s county fair. But one resident says the action unfairly singles her out.
Sarah Burkett says her chickens were grandfathered in by the town council several years ago, and there hasn’t been much of an issue since then. “I actually have spoke to the town, and there have been no complaints about noise or smell, just that they were alive,” she says. “I have gone to most of my neighbors, and no one has an issue with them. Nobody has had any complaints. There have not been any noise complaints from anyone.” She says that the chickens roost and sleep at night, making it unlikely that they’re keeping neighbors up.
But exactly how those chickens were grandfathered in has been a source of confusion during recent council meetings. Council President Wendy Hoppe believed the measure only applied to the specific chickens on the property at the time, and no new chickens could be obtained. To settle the question, council members requested that documentation be provided. As of last week, they hadn’t received any.
However, Burkett says she has a copy of the minutes of the meeting when her chickens were grandfathered in. And she says she wasn’t the only one allowed to keep chickens. “There’s also another farm, that is an actual farm, that has been grandfathered in, and they have not had anything going on,” she says. “So I just don’t know why I’m being singled out.”
Town officials said last week the issue was acreage. Clerk-Treasurer Alicia Collins said when it comes to having animals, there’s a difference between living on a farm and living in the middle of a neighborhood. Collins suggested that council members may consider adding acreage requirements into the ordinance.
Burkett says that several cities allow residents to keep a certain number of chickens with no acreage minimum, including Indianapolis, South Bend, Valparaiso, and Chesterton. But some rural communities have been reluctant to follow suit. Last year, the Winamac Town Council narrowly voted down an urban chicken ordinance. At the time, Winamac officials contacted eight other communities in the area, and none of them recommended allowing chickens within city limits.
However, Burkett says becoming more chicken-friendly could make North Judson more attractive to new residents. “Why are we not trying to attract younger people that are asking to have this? This is the craziest thing. Let’s worry about getting more movies at Norwayne, which is fantastic, getting more color runs. Let’s focus on those things,” she says. “Chickens that aren’t bothering anyone – or I’m sorry, bothering one person – it just seems like a very small thing. I don’t understand it, when I have already been allowed to have them.”
Burkett also takes issue with a comment made during last week’s council meeting by Officer Thomas, regarding the timeline of the chickens’ removal, specifically, “They can get through their 4-H, and then it’s dinner time.”
“I find the humor in it, but very distasteful,” Burkett says, “when you have an eight-year-old that loves her chickens, and then also my three-year-old that goes out and collects chickens. And we have one hen that is very sweet and will allow you to pick her up. My kids are learning how to feed and water and collect eggs. They’re learning where their food comes from. What is the harm in this?”
Burkett plans to discuss the issue with the town council during its next regular meeting on July 3. It’s scheduled for 6:30 p.m. at the North Judson Town Hall, but Burkett says the interest being generated may mean it will have to be moved to a larger venue.
Tuesday, June 20, 2017
North Judson to Evict Chickens, Town Council to Continue Reviewing Animal Ordinance
Posted on June 20, 2017
Author Michael Gallenberger, WKVI
North Judson’s chickens will soon have to find a new home.
After reviewing the town’s existing animal ordinance, Town Council President Wendy Hoppe said Monday that it clearly prohibits farm animals from being kept inside the town limits. “These animals include but are not limited to the following species: cattle, horses, donkeys, mules, sheep, swine, goats, chickens, roosters, geese, turkeys, ducks, and other related fowl, et cetera,” Hoppe read from the ordinance.
However, members of the Ransom family previously said they had a letter from the town, saying they could continue to have a certain number of chickens. During Monday’s town council meeting, though, Clerk-Treasurer Alicia Collins said the Ransoms failed to present such a letter to town officials, as requested.
The town council voted to have police officer Frank Thomas enforce the ordinance and remove the chickens. But since they’re being raised as part of a 4-H project, Thomas agreed to let the chickens stay until after next month’s county fair. “They can get through their 4-H, and then it’s dinner time, or however you want to look at it,” he said.
Council member Jane Ellen Felchuk opposed the motion, due to some concerns with the animal ordinance as it currently exists. Specifically, she wanted to see a provision explicitly prohibiting the feeding of feral cats.
Collins agreed the ordinance needs some review, since enforcing it would also mean 4-H families in more rural parts of town would also have to give up their animals. “We may need to look at doing an acreage thing or something,” Collins said. “Obviously, people that live right in the middle of town do not have eight acres that they could have animals on, but some people that live on the boundaries of town that have 4-H animals do and that were annexed in. So that will be the next thing that we’re going to deal with.”
Town Attorney Justin Schramm agreed to start researching other communities’ animal ordinances. However, he reminded council members that any ordinance needs to be based on rational standards and can’t be designed to target individual people.
Author Michael Gallenberger, WKVI
North Judson’s chickens will soon have to find a new home.
After reviewing the town’s existing animal ordinance, Town Council President Wendy Hoppe said Monday that it clearly prohibits farm animals from being kept inside the town limits. “These animals include but are not limited to the following species: cattle, horses, donkeys, mules, sheep, swine, goats, chickens, roosters, geese, turkeys, ducks, and other related fowl, et cetera,” Hoppe read from the ordinance.
However, members of the Ransom family previously said they had a letter from the town, saying they could continue to have a certain number of chickens. During Monday’s town council meeting, though, Clerk-Treasurer Alicia Collins said the Ransoms failed to present such a letter to town officials, as requested.
The town council voted to have police officer Frank Thomas enforce the ordinance and remove the chickens. But since they’re being raised as part of a 4-H project, Thomas agreed to let the chickens stay until after next month’s county fair. “They can get through their 4-H, and then it’s dinner time, or however you want to look at it,” he said.
Council member Jane Ellen Felchuk opposed the motion, due to some concerns with the animal ordinance as it currently exists. Specifically, she wanted to see a provision explicitly prohibiting the feeding of feral cats.
Collins agreed the ordinance needs some review, since enforcing it would also mean 4-H families in more rural parts of town would also have to give up their animals. “We may need to look at doing an acreage thing or something,” Collins said. “Obviously, people that live right in the middle of town do not have eight acres that they could have animals on, but some people that live on the boundaries of town that have 4-H animals do and that were annexed in. So that will be the next thing that we’re going to deal with.”
Town Attorney Justin Schramm agreed to start researching other communities’ animal ordinances. However, he reminded council members that any ordinance needs to be based on rational standards and can’t be designed to target individual people.
Monday, June 19, 2017
North Judson Council to Get Update from Starke County Economic Development Foundation
Posted on June 19, 2017
Author Michael Gallenberger, WKVI
The North Judson Town Council will get an update from Starke County Economic Development Foundation Executive Director Charlie Weaver tonight. Recently, Weaver’s been discussing plans to bring U.S. 30 up to freeway standards in the northern part of Starke County, as well as efforts to develop properties around North Judson and elsewhere.
North Judson’s animal ordinance is once again listed on tonight’s town council meeting agenda. Town officials planned to review it, following complaints last month about chickens in town.
Tonight’s North Judson Town Council meeting starts at 6:30 at the town hall.
Author Michael Gallenberger, WKVI
The North Judson Town Council will get an update from Starke County Economic Development Foundation Executive Director Charlie Weaver tonight. Recently, Weaver’s been discussing plans to bring U.S. 30 up to freeway standards in the northern part of Starke County, as well as efforts to develop properties around North Judson and elsewhere.
North Judson’s animal ordinance is once again listed on tonight’s town council meeting agenda. Town officials planned to review it, following complaints last month about chickens in town.
Tonight’s North Judson Town Council meeting starts at 6:30 at the town hall.
Tuesday, May 23, 2017
Chickens Complaints Lead to Lengthy Discussion During North Judson Town Council Meeting
Posted on May 23, 2017
Author Michael Gallenberger, WKVI
The North Judson Town Council may revisit its animal ordinance, following complaints about chickens during last week’s meeting. Nearly six years ago, council members voted to prohibit residents from keeping farm animals, including chickens, within town limits. But during last week’s meeting, some residents complained that they continue to see chickens in North Judson.
When council members decided to outlaw farm animals, they agreed to allow at least one household to keep their existing chickens. But there appears to be some confusion as to whether that meant keeping only those specific chickens until they died off or were otherwise disposed of or simply not exceeding that number in the future.
Council President Wendy Hoppe believed the exception only applied to that particular group of chickens, and they were not supposed to be replaced with new ones. However, resident Steve Ransom, whose daughter keeps several chickens, said she had received a letter from the town, stating otherwise. Clerk-Treasurer Alicia Collins could find no record of such a letter having been sent, and Ransom didn’t specify which town official sent it.
Other residents complained that the chickens attract a rooster from outside the town limits, waking people up in the morning. Council members gave the Ransoms five days to present the letter to the town, and let Town Attorney Justin Schramm advise them on how to proceed. Schramm also suggested double checking the board’s actions on the matter, to make sure they were properly advertised and are legally enforceable.
Author Michael Gallenberger, WKVI
The North Judson Town Council may revisit its animal ordinance, following complaints about chickens during last week’s meeting. Nearly six years ago, council members voted to prohibit residents from keeping farm animals, including chickens, within town limits. But during last week’s meeting, some residents complained that they continue to see chickens in North Judson.
When council members decided to outlaw farm animals, they agreed to allow at least one household to keep their existing chickens. But there appears to be some confusion as to whether that meant keeping only those specific chickens until they died off or were otherwise disposed of or simply not exceeding that number in the future.
Council President Wendy Hoppe believed the exception only applied to that particular group of chickens, and they were not supposed to be replaced with new ones. However, resident Steve Ransom, whose daughter keeps several chickens, said she had received a letter from the town, stating otherwise. Clerk-Treasurer Alicia Collins could find no record of such a letter having been sent, and Ransom didn’t specify which town official sent it.
Other residents complained that the chickens attract a rooster from outside the town limits, waking people up in the morning. Council members gave the Ransoms five days to present the letter to the town, and let Town Attorney Justin Schramm advise them on how to proceed. Schramm also suggested double checking the board’s actions on the matter, to make sure they were properly advertised and are legally enforceable.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)